I am the time traveller you were expecting for...

New member

Sorry to disappoint some of you (if really exists anyone) but accept it... if a real time traveller came to this time, he surely wouldn't mind to make his travel public at least if we consider a sane human makes that journey.

Seeing this section and those self-proclaimed "time travellers" it's funny, and interesting.

Anyway, it's a shame, it seems that entropy also makes effect on the web forums. Greetings from 2014!

New member

Ha ha! Nice topic. I am not a time traveler. I have been thinking though, what a possible proof a real time traveler can perform? Imagine, that suddenly you appear in the year of 1980. How you will prove, that you have come from the year of 2014?

New member

Ha ha! Nice topic. I am not a time traveler. I have been thinking though, what a possible proof a real time traveler can perform? Imagine, that suddenly you appear in the year of 1980. How you will prove, that you have come from the year of 2014?

Oh, I don't know; stop off two weeks in advance of your final stop in 1980, maybe buy a dozen different newspapers for that day and bring them along and show them around to the forum. You know, offer some proof with that pudding that can be tested two weeks later.

It may not actually prove that you came from 2014 but it would be pretty compelling don't you think? And no, not a single wannabe time traveler over the past 15 years has been willing to offer that one up. I have asked. They offer up a lot of double talk and excuses but no newspapers.

New member

If time travel in short time - 20 - 30 years, maybe genetic test will do it?In order two people to be genetically identical they have to be twins. But if they are twins, they have to be at one and the same age. If the one is 5 years old, and the other is 50 years old, and they are genetically identical, and the 50 years old claims, that comes from the future, than can it be accepted?

New member

How about a genetic test?
If time travel in short time - 20 - 30 years, maybe genetic test will do it?In order two people to be genetically identical they have to be twins. But if they are twins, they have to be at one and the same age. If the one is 5 years old, and the other is 50 years old, and they are genetically identical, and the 50 years old claims, that comes from the future, than can it be accepted?

Sure, it can be accepted. This sort of situation is Special Relativity based and though it is not practically possible it is technically possible because no laws of physics are violated.

The "Twins Paradox" isn't a paradox at all. One twin accelerates to some high velocity with respect to the other twin (preferably close to the speed of light but any velocity will do), run around the universe for a specific amount of time as measured in his ship, return to Earth and viola! They are no longer the same age. If you were an identical twin and you spent more time flying around the world in commercial aircraft you would end up younger by a few microseconds than your twin. Getting a difference of 45 years during their lifetimes would most definitely require a velocity near the speed of light. Which twin ages more slowly? The twin that felt the accelerating forces of speeding up, turning around and slowing down when s/he arrived back at Earth.

Just how fast and for how long? You'd have to do a bit of algebra using the Lorentz Transformations to arrive at a precise answer. This sort of relativistic de-synchronization of clocks is quite real, predicted by Special Relativity and is measured every day by, for instance, the GPS satellite system. GPS clocks have to be re-synched daily because the satellites are moving at high velocity with respect to the ground based GPS receivers.

New member

Oh, I don't know; stop off two weeks in advance of your final stop in 1980, maybe buy a dozen different newspapers for that day and bring them along and show them around to the forum. You know, offer some proof with that pudding that can be tested two weeks later.

New member

If the events were in the recent future, then it is reasonable to assume that the person who printed the newspaper either had control over the events in question (not likely, but still possible) or else had sufficient knowledge to reach a conclusion.

If the events were far enough in the future to eliminate this possibility, then I would only arrive at the conclusion of time travel once the need to arrive at that conclusion had passed.

Which is to say that if I am handed a newspaper which supposedly is set a week in the future, and those events come true, then I can assume that the person who made that newspaper had some kind of insider information - most likely at whichever establishment produces the periodical. If there were accurately reprinted news stories and editorials, I would simply assume that the person who printed the first paper had access to email or documents, intercepted them, and printed them first.

But if I am handed a newspaper which is supposedly set two years in the future, then I won't know for sure until two years have passed - which makes this a deeply troublesome method for someone who is trying to accomplish a goal by convincing me of something.

If the goal is to convince me, and they do the above, then come back after I'm convinced, and need help THEN... well, this is a massive risk. Now I'm aware of the truth that they are time traveling. But who's to say that I agree with their goals? I may have just created an enemy. Or perhaps I'll engage in the all-too-familiar practice of DENIAL. If a time traveler is intending to change a human being's mind, they must accept a chance of failure.

Therefore this is a plan which requires THREE separate missions to the past: first to pick up the relevant newspapers, second to deliver them to a displaced position in the timeline, and third to rendezvous with the contact. This is a very resource-draining plan, considering that the potential benefit is ONE temporal native ally, the most likely outcome is "I still don't believe you", and there's always the possibility of creating an enemy.